This report is focused around Lost and Found data using the intakes and outcomes data received for 2019 and 2020. Its goal is to reflect everything we could learn about L&F from the available data and highlight things that would be useful to show but some/all data required for them are missing.
Scroll down or use the table of contents on the left to navigate throughout the document. Most sections contain multiple tabs showing different facets of a data type. Most plots are interactive, meaning they include tooltips and allow hiding and showing parts and zooming in and out. If something went wrong, look for the house icon in the top right corner of each figure to reset.
This section provides an overview of the RTH rate per year divided by species. RTH Rate is calculated as the portion of returned animals that came in as strays out of stray animals. Normally, we also exclude neonate cats, but age group was not easily available in the data supplied.
This table covers all strays and RTHs. For both cats and dogs, these rates are extremely high compared to other HASS shelters.
| Species | Year | Strays | RTH_Count | RTH_Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cat | 2019 | 965 | 84 | 0.09 |
| Cat | 2020 | 786 | 78 | 0.10 |
| Dog | 2019 | 3352 | 1866 | 0.56 |
| Dog | 2020 | 2011 | 1173 | 0.58 |
| Other | 2019 | 500 | 9 | 0.02 |
| Other | 2020 | 614 | 18 | 0.03 |
This one only counts animals who came in as strays from the field (using subtype ‘FIELD’). These are then split by RTH method between field (using src_outcome_subtype ‘FIELD’), shelter (all other values), and unknowns (missing/null).
Field RTH for cats are unsurprisingly rare. For dogs, rates remain the same across 2019 and 2020, with returns from the shelters being strikingly high.
| Species | Year | Field_Strays | RTH_Subtype | Field_RTH_Count | RTH_Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cat | 2019 | 128 | Field Return | 3 | 0.02 |
| Cat | 2019 | 128 | Shelter Return | 7 | 0.05 |
| Cat | 2019 | 128 | Unknown | 3 | 0.02 |
| Cat | 2020 | 143 | Field Return | 1 | 0.01 |
| Cat | 2020 | 143 | Shelter Return | 15 | 0.10 |
| Dog | 2019 | 1090 | Field Return | 266 | 0.24 |
| Dog | 2019 | 1090 | Shelter Return | 506 | 0.46 |
| Dog | 2019 | 1090 | Unknown | 13 | 0.01 |
| Dog | 2020 | 763 | Field Return | 201 | 0.26 |
| Dog | 2020 | 763 | Shelter Return | 356 | 0.47 |
| Dog | 2020 | 763 | Unknown | 25 | 0.03 |
Excluding animals coming in from the field. Again, very high shelter RTO rates.
| Species | Year | OTC_Strays | Shelter_RTH | RTH_Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cat | 2019 | 837 | 71 | 0.08 |
| Cat | 2020 | 643 | 62 | 0.10 |
| Dog | 2019 | 2262 | 1081 | 0.48 |
| Dog | 2020 | 1248 | 591 | 0.47 |
| Other | 2019 | 153 | 3 | 0.02 |
| Other | 2020 | 91 | 1 | 0.01 |
These three time series show the RTH rate per month, to show whether there were times with particularly high or low rates as well as the overall trajectory.
Steadily, impressively high.
This is the same figure, but only counting field strays, and showing only dogs due to cats’ low numbers. The different lines split the rate of return by Field RTH or in-shelter RTH. RTH dogs with missing subtypes were included in the Shelter category.
Interesting pattern around when the pandemic first hit with two months of peak shelter returns and low field returns, which have since then balanced again.
This figure only counts strays who did not come from the field. Steadily high.
This section shows the number of stray intakes over time, as well as the breakdown of strays by field/shelter intake.
This could be another useful metrics to reflect the benefits of RTH over other outcome types. It takes into account three components:
There were 1866 strays who got RTH in 2019 and 1173 in 2020. Assuming 30$ cost of daily care per dog, and given the length-of-stay differences, We can estimate that return-to-homes saved Denver Animal Shelter \(1866*30*12=\$671,760\) in 2019 and \(1173*12*30=\$422,280\) in 2020.
Of course, that is a pretty simplistic calculation. This can be made more nuanced by differentiating field/shelter returns and incorporating the costs associated with them, if relevant.
| Species | Outcome | Count | Average_Length_Of_Stay |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cat | Other Outcomes | 1161 | 14.11 |
| Cat | RTO | 162 | 3.43 |
| Dog | Other Outcomes | 1838 | 14.02 |
| Dog | RTO | 3039 | 1.80 |
The following maps show stray intake and RTH rate by ZIP codes to highlight geographical patterns. The first and second tab are similar to previous metrics; the third tab, RTH Gap, shows the number of strays who were not returned home per ZIP code.
Note: geographical data is often skewed towards the shelter’s ZIP code when its address/ZIP code is inserted by default. Usually, we would go over the crossing address and remove animals that have it listed as the shelter, but it was not done yet for this data – could be done if relevant.
The one ZIP code further from Tuscon stands out – other than that, most areas are roughly similar.
This combines the other two tabs to highlight where most additional RTH potential exists. As the RTH rate is uniformly high across the city, the areas with more stray intakes stand out.
I noted you have an ‘Office’ vs ‘Email’ values for outcome subtypes for RTH, so here is the breakdown of these subtypes (excluding field).
| Year | Outcome_Subtype | N |
|---|---|---|
| 2019 | Office | 1425 |
| 2019 | 231 | |
| 2019 | Null | 16 |
| 2019 | Shelter | 7 |
| 2020 | Office | 832 |
| 2020 | 201 | |
| 2020 | Null | 27 |
Frequently missing values:
Intake subtype has 10 values assigned to less than 10 animals, could be removed to simplify.
Outcome subtype - the presence of ways to indicate how a return was achieved stands out. Here too there are multiple values that are rarely in use.
Other things we could show if we had the data for it: